Mcdonald's Second Amendment Essay

1083 Words5 Pages
There is a glass of water filled halfway with water sitting on a table. Is the glass half empty or half full? Many people have heard this divided interpretation of a glass of water before and have differing views of whether it is half full or half empty. Yes, a glass of water is not a huge issue the country is facing, however, there is another issue this country is facing currently with the same principle that is escalating with time. Everyone learned in school about the bill of rights and about the amendments of the Constitution, which states every United States citizen’s basic human rights. Recently, the second amendment, the right to bear arms, has been under intense scrutiny and misinterpretation of this amendment is a growing problem spreading…show more content…
An African American retired custodian, Otis McDonald, took on the city of Chicago, which had the similar law restricting gun control policies as the Heller case. So, it comes to no one’s surprise that according to Encyclopedia Britannica, McDonald filed his lawsuit on the same day Heller’s case decision was announced to the public. Chicago was banning new registration of handguns, yet making a registration for handguns a requirement. The decision to change this regulation was made on June 28, 2010, when the court sided with McDonald 5-4. Although this case is recent it is still not the most recent major court case regarding the subject of gun control. Jamie Caetano fought her conviction of possession of a stun gun just this year. She claims she was protecting herself, in self-defense, against an abusive ex-boyfriend. Massachusetts argues that stun guns were not what the second amendment meant by “the right to bear arms” and is not common amongst military use and therefore should be excluded. In a unanimous decision, the supreme court sides with Caetano saying that although it wasn’t in existence during the founding and the enactment of the second amendment, the right to use this stun gun as a method of self-defense is still protected under the second
Open Document